Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old February 8th, 2004 #21
Nancy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvespasian
Frederik, you have erred here.

The only progress that can be made with graffitti scrawling trulls like this is to annoint the dear things with oil and ENLIGHTEN THEM. A mixture of SAE 40W with 87 octane makes a good ointment for them.
You are so so clever. You don't like what I say so you threaten me. Come at it. Let me know the time and the place.

Otherwise, why don't you learn to READ?
 
Old February 8th, 2004 #22
Nancy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tvespasian

It would be nice if we could dissect beasties of this sort and discover anything which might organically incline them toward their depravity, but we can't just yet.

The best this thing could do w.r.t. my post was to puke up a few links to a website I'm already quite familiar with and even find some use for. For example, Yogi Aravind's essay, titled "Arya: Its Significance" [http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histo...an_arvind.html] certainly IS a nice little essay...
...In 1853, Max Muller introduced the word 'Arya' into the English and European usage as applying to a racial and linguistic group when propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself refuted his own theory and wrote:
" I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language... to me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar." (Max Muller, Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas, 1888, pg 120)...

...Further, a recent landmark global study in population genetics by a team of internationally reputed scientists over 50 years (The History and Geography of Human Genes, by Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza, Princeton University Press) reveals that the people habitated in the Indian subcontinent and nearby including Europe, all belong to one single race of Caucasion type. According to this study, there is essentially, and has been no difference racially between north Indians and the so-called Dravidian South Indians. The racial composition has remained almost the same for millennia. This study also confirms that there is no race called as an Aryan race...
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histor...n_agrawal.html
 
Old February 8th, 2004 #23
Spandau
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy
...In 1853, Max Muller introduced the word 'Arya' into the English and European usage as applying to a racial and linguistic group when propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself refuted his own theory and wrote:
" I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language... to me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar." (Max Muller, Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas, 1888, pg 120)...

...Further, a recent landmark global study in population genetics by a team of internationally reputed scientists over 50 years (The History and Geography of Human Genes, by Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi and Alberto Piazza, Princeton University Press) reveals that the people habitated in the Indian subcontinent and nearby including Europe, all belong to one single race of Caucasion type. According to this study, there is essentially, and has been no difference racially between north Indians and the so-called Dravidian South Indians. The racial composition has remained almost the same for millennia. This study also confirms that there is no race called as an Aryan race...
http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histor...n_agrawal.html
Still can't find it within yourself to post in the Opposistion Forum? Tom88? Can we have this person escorted to said Forum?
 
Old February 9th, 2004 #24
Nancy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spandau
Still can't find it within yourself to post in the Opposistion Forum? Tom88? Can we have this person escorted to said Forum?
If at any time a moderator requests that I post in the Opposition Forum, I will be happy to stop posting. I am here as a guest, and will comply with their request. I won't go to someone's cyber-version of a ghetto--so I'll have to stop posting all together. But I'm assuming that would please you.
 
Old February 9th, 2004 #25
Nancy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by saxonrage

Have a look at some of the "Chosens" teachings from the piece of pornography called the Talmud, Judaisms holiest book...

http://www.churchofthesonsofyhvh.org/talmud_exposed.htm

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/talmudx.htm

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/talmudic.html[/b]
Because the Torah is a very complex and demanding scripture, those who chose at their peril (many of whom died in pogroms, mass killings, and inquisitions) to follow it, also developed a set of writings to study it. This set of writings is called the Talmud.

It includes many horrible things, because the human mind is horrible. It has been said that before a child can receive their bar or bat mitzvah (the rite in which they become an adult, and responsible before God for following Jewish law), they should be capable of arguing a reason for breaking each one of the ten commandments. Not that they should break them, mind you, but that they should be intellectually adept enough to do so.

I noticed that you didn't send me any links to the Talmud itself. What you've sent is someone's ideas of the Talmud, who has a personal agenda to destroy Judaism and its supporters. Of course, that person maybe feels jutified, because they think that the Jews want to destroy him. No where in those links, though, do you see the actual Talmud. Just the excerpts that someone has selected to bolster their arguments.

In the Talmud, as in Shakespeare, you will find the most horrible, to the ridiculous, to the sublime. It is not considered kosher to cut out some parts of it to make oneself look better. It is all there--the good, the bad, and the ugly.
As in the law we remember--about stoning an adulterer--it was rarely if ever put into practice. There were so many laws and sublaws (for example, two witnesses had to catch the adulterer in the act, etc., etc.) that it just rarely happened. So I'm not surprised to find that there may be something in there about marrying or having sex with a three year old. While it's repugnant to anyone but a pedophile, it is a situation that someone, somewhere must have felt merited need of a "spiritual referee", so to speak (and hmmmm, I wonder what the proportion of "white" pedophiles is compared to "jewish" pedophiles--but I digress....)

The Talmud is speculation about Jewish law, pure and simple. This conversation is similar to one about mathematics or chess. The man who was portrayed in "A Brilliant Mind" could look at a screen full of numbers and see patterns that no one else could even imagine. Expert chess players can look at a game and see it from beginning to end. But just because people can function on an extremely abstract level, doesn't make them candidates for "Good Neighbor of the Year". They're usually not the people that people want to go out and have a beer with after the game. So that Talmudic scholars may have said some really offensive things It doesn't mean that they advocated violence or child abuse.

All I can say is study it before you jump to conclusions. Don't take the mutton-headed views of someone who has a hidden agenda.
 
Old February 9th, 2004 #26
Ossian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Missouri, USSA
Posts: 922
Default

"There are no cruelties in ancient history ... that the inventiveness of our contemporaries ... has not outdone. But cruelty, the violence of cowards, is merely one expression of violence among many, though admittedly the most repulsive one. ...[M]an has become ... more and more violent--and not less and less so, as people fed on pacifist propaganda are often inclined to think.
"As time goes on and as decay sets in, the keynote of human history is not less violence; it is less honesty about violence.
"The only time modern men and women do not try to minimize horrors but actually exaggerate them (and often deliberately invent them) is when these happen to be, or are intended to be presented as "the enemy's" horrors--never their own. And that is itself only a further instance of the worldwide characteristic of our times: the general love of lies."
--Savitri Devi, The Lightning and the Sun


"I am one of the few goyim who have ever actually tackled the Talmud. I suppose you now expect me to add that it is a profound and noble work, worthy of hard study by all other goyim. Unhappily, my report must differ from this expectation. It seems to me, save for a few bright spots, to be quite indistinguishable from rubbish.... "
--H.L. Mencken
__________________
Produce good men -- the rest follows.
--William G. Simpson
The Morality of Survival

Last edited by Ossian; February 9th, 2004 at 11:09 PM.
 
Old February 10th, 2004 #27
Nancy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by saxonrage
OK Nancy...Give us the un-muttonheaded view on this Talmudic script...AND...Please by all means show us in the Torah where the words are that this particular script is meant to expound upon or make more clear or whatever it is that YOU claim the purpose of these pornographic writings are in relation to the Torah...The floor is all yours...


Sanhedrin 55b: "What if a Jew committed bestiality in ignorance; must there have been a stumbling block and degradation and in this case there is only degredation, but no sin; or perhaps for degradation alone without there having been a stumbling block (the animal is stoned)? . . . A maiden aged three years and one day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his"
Some of it is posted on the same website: http://www.come-and-hear.com/

Just go to the original, holographic documents. Most of the hoopla is from Dillings admittedly prejudiced work. She underlines a few passages, and ignores thousands of others. The footnotes should also be read. That website provides the original documents if you follow the links. And I think I figured out what this three-year old thing is about. Read the following:

Bath Sheba being only six years when she conceived, because a woman has more [generative] vitality; the proof being that she bore a child before Solomon?18 —

It is also written. Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed and said in his heart, shall a child be born unto him that is on hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old bear?24 Hence, Abraham was ten years older than Sarah, and two years older than her father [Haran]. Therefore, Sarah must have been born when Haran was eight years old. But why so: perhaps Abram was the youngest of the brethren, the Writ giving them in order of wisdom? In proof of this contention, it is written, And Noah was five hundred years old, and Noah begat Shem, Ham and Japheth; hence [if the order is according to age],

Deduct fourteen, Bezaleel's age at the time,36 this leaves twenty-six [as Caleb's age at Bezaleel's birth]. Now, deduct two years for the three pregnancies; hence each must have begotten at the age of eight.37
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedr...in_69.html#E82

Now, as I said at the beginning, take into account the Talmud is the commentary on the Torah, much like law offices are filled with books on various opinions on legal decisions. Some of those old rabbis had nothing better to do than sit around in dark offices, figuring out how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. So someone, somehow, figured out that there was a time when time was not what it is today. People were adults at three and six and eight, and had children accordingly. They also had children when they were hundreds of years old. I, for one, would attribute the discrepancies to a scribe's errors, or to somebody getting drunk while they were writing out those old boring manuscripts. But they took things literally.

I would venture to guess that more pederasts in some trailer trash community in one year commit these despicable acts than all of the times put together in all of Jewish history. But that doesn't mean that the perpetrators shouldn't have been punished in a slow, memorable way before dying, Jew or "white". I also happen to agree with Mencken, as would most Jews, I'd venture to guess. At least the ones I know.
 
Old February 10th, 2004 #28
Nancy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by saxonrage
You have figured out nothing. You only make excuses for something that is written in easy to understand terms because you refuse to see the truth contained in those writings. PERIOD !

This Jewish swill (the Talmud) plainly states...

A maiden aged three years and one day may be acquired in marriage by coition (sexual intercourse)

Let me ask you; you claim to have figured out this 3 year old thing and ramble on some nonsense about Bath Sheba being six years old when she conceived. Where in Gods Holy word does it say that Bath Sheba was 6 yrs old when she conceived ? Let me answer that question for you, just to save you the trouble of wracking that closed trap of a brain of yours. It doesn't say that at all, ANYWHERE. The first time Bath Sheba is mentioned in scripture is in 2 Samuel, chapter 11 and it clearly states that she was a woman not a 6 year old girl...

2 Samuel, chapter 11

"1": And it came to pass, after the year was expired, at the time when kings go forth to battle, that David sent Joab, and his servants with him, and all Israel; and they destroyed the children of Ammon, and besieged Rabbah. But David tarried still at Jerusalem.

"2": And it came to pass in an eveningtide, that David arose from off his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king's house: and from the roof he saw a woman washing herself; and the woman was very beautiful to look upon.

"3": And David sent and inquired after the woman. And one said, Is not this Bath-sheba, the daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite?

And besides explain away all of the other perverted verses in the Talmud such as those that state that Christ is boiling in human excrement in hell. Yes the Talmud was writtem by men. Men of the Satanic seedline of Lucifer ! Genesis 3:15...
For Ahitopel begat Eliam (ii), Eliam begat Bath Sheba (i), and Bath Sheba begat Jedidiah, i.e., Solomon (iii). Now even allowing only seven months for each pregnancy, these three must have taken nearly two years (Rashi tries to prove that it would take exactly two years, by allowing an additional month in each case for pre-conception menstruation and purification; but this is difficult, and it is preferable to assume with Tosaf. that the two years are approximate). Thus twenty four years are left for the three generations, giving eight years for each: Ahitopel must have been eight years at the conception of Eliam; Eliam eight years at the conception of Bath Sheba; Bath Sheba eight years at the conception of Solomon.
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedr...in_69.html#E82

From the same "Jewish" Encyclopedia that Diller misquotes. And FYI, this same kind of batting around of ideas is EXACTLY what the Talmud is about. None of them are law, like the Torah. Haven't read the quote about Christ boiling in excrement, but would imagine that it might have something to do with Him being considered a false Messiah, and having brought down the Roman Empire around their ears. That might do it, although I disagree with the interpretation.
Anyway, adios.
 
Old February 10th, 2004 #29
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy
Haven't read the quote about Christ boiling in excrement, but would imagine that it might have something to do with Him being considered a false Messiah, and having brought down the Roman Empire around their ears. That might do it, although I disagree with the interpretation.
Anyway, adios.
That section of the Talmud is called the Toledoth Yeshu. Judaism in its unadulterated state is as anti-Christian as the Pharisees of the Book of Matthew. Note that Jesus did not say "Woe unto you scribes and some of you Pharisees." The idea that some of the Pharisees (forerunners of Judaism) might be okay just isn't there.

Last edited by Hadding; February 10th, 2004 at 10:11 PM.
 
Old February 14th, 2004 #30
MOMUS
Doubts the official story
 
MOMUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Pineywoods
Posts: 4,974
Default Semantics

Just as the word Aryan was coined by a 19th Cen. linguistics scholar and is meant to pertains only to language, the same applies the word Semitic. Look it up in your Websters, it describes the language family of speakers of Arabic, Hebrew, Maltese, etc. So, how is it that by adding the prefix anti we get a word that now is limited only to describing anyone critical of the zionist Entity? Shouldn't, by your argument, an antisemite be someone who hates the Maltese language or perhaps Arabic?
Tell me, when you discovered that Aryan described only a language family and not a people as such, did you drop your study of "Aryan history" that you allege brought you to this forum in the first place?
You remind me of the negress that ran the "multicultural awareness" indroctrination class that I was forced to attend to in order to remain employed.The first thing she told us was that race doesn't exist, then she spent two days telling us how badly her race is abused by mine and how I should be her ally to help mitigate the injustice, blah, blah.
You can see race exhibited in other species; Grackes are divided into a purple and a bronze race based on the sheen of their feathers. Snow geese and Blue geese are the same bird, different colors. Breeds in domestic animals are similar.
Sometimes race blends into speciation in some animals; lions and tigers can inter-breed and the result differs according to the sex of the species, gigantism is associated with either the tigon or the liger, I forget which.
I read a recent book on bears that states that all but two of the seven or so species of bear can successfully interbreed, polar bears and browns have "accidently" interbred in captivity. They could as well breed with sloth bears. And here is my point; the resulting hybrid would likely be a failure in either catching seals or snorting termites from a rotten log.
Fortunately for the bears there is no global parasitic breed of uber-bear that wants to tikkun that miscegination into being.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 AM.
Page generated in 0.21160 seconds.